Vol. 12(5) pp.

97-103, May 2018

DOI: 10.5897/AJFS2017.1678
Article Number: B07F2C256656
ISSN 1996-0794 African Journal of Food Science
Copyright © 2018
Author(s) retain the copyright of this article
http://www.academicjournals.org/AJFS

Full Length Research Paper

Quality attributes of homemade tomato sauce stored at

different temperatures
Smith Gilliard Nkhata1* and Emmanuel Owino Ayua2
1
Department of Agriculture and Extension Services (DAES) Food and Nutrition Branch, Ministry of Agriculture, Irrigation
and Water Development, P. O. Box 30145, Lilongwe, Malawi.
2
Department of Food Science and Nutrition, University of Eldoret, P. O. Box 1125-30100, Eldoret, Kenya.
Received 1 December, 2017; Accepted 26 March, 2018

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) is processed into different products including tomato sauce. The
aim of this study was to determine the quality attributes of homemade tomato sauce during storage at 6
and 30°C for 8 weeks. At 4 weeks, there were no significant changes in sensory attributes during
storage at both 6 and 30°C. There were significant differences (P˂0.05) of sensory attributes after 6
weeks. Sauce stored at 30°C had higher microbial load than at 6°C. Both sensory mean scores and pH
were inversely related to microbial growth. Therefore, the shelf-life of homemade tomato sauce could
be increased at low temperature (6°C).

Key words: Homemade tomato sauce, storage temperatures, sensory, attributes.

INTRODUCTION

Tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum Mill.) is one of the
most important agricultural products among fresh
vegetables in most countries in the world. It is widely
distributed in Asia, Europe, North and South America,
and North Africa. Tomato belongs to the Solanaceae
family. Tomatoes are consumed widely throughout the
world in different forms such as canned whole tomatoes,
tomato juice, tomato sauce, tomato paste and ketchup
sauce (Wasim and Singh, 2015; Anthon and Barrett,
2010; Hossain et al., 2011). Among crops, tomato (L.
esculentum), with a total production of around 160 million
tons per year, is the second most important source of
nourishment (after potatoes) for the world’s population
(FAOSTAT, 2015). Its consumption has increased in the
last few years with the commercialization of several
processed products such as sauces, juices, soups and
purees. It has been estimated that 35% of raw tomatoes
are consumed as sauces, 18% as tomato paste, 17% as
canned tomatoes, 15% are transformed into juices and
15% into ketchup (Canene-Adams et al., 2005; Raiola et
al., 2014).
Tomato consumption has recently been demonstrated
to possess health benefits (Levy and Sharoni, 2004; Hsu
et al., 2008; Eunmi et al., 2012), because of its rich
content of bioactive phytonutrients such as lycopene, β-
carotene, vitamins E and C, phenolics, organic acids

*Corresponding author. E-mail: nkhatasmith@yahoo.co.uk.

Author(s) agree that this article remains permanently open access under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution
License 4.0 International License
98 Afr. J. Food Sci.
and flavonoids (Kaur et al., 2002; Periago and Garcia-
Alonso, 2009; Kalogeropoulos et al., 2012; Trivedi and
Patel, 2015). Consumption of tomatoes and tomato
sauce was associated with a reduced risk of developing
digestive tract and prostate cancers (Campbell et al.,
2004). Tomatoes are also one of the main parts of the
Mediterranean diet which has been associated with a low
mortality from cardiovascular troubles. Because tomatoes
constitute the almost exclusive source of lycopene, this
pigment could be one of the active agents of this
protection (Helyes et al., 2009; Shi et al., 2009).
Tomato is a relatively short duration crop and gives a
high yield, it is economically attractive and the area under
cultivation is increasing daily, but prone to spoilage due
to high water content (AVRDC, 1992). To provide diverse
tomato products, drying and making of tomato pulp
remain the most commonly used processing and
preservation method practised by smallholder farmers
(AVRDC, 1992). Solar drying in particular is a widely
practised form of preserving fruits and vegetables
because it is cheap and no energy cost is incurred (Ayua
et al., 2017). However, dried products may require
reconstitution, which may be inconvenient to consumers.
As an alternative solution to drying, refrigeration and
holding tomatoes at room temperatures either in their
fresh forms or as processed tomato sauces are widely
done (Raci et al., 2014).
Tomato sauce is made from tomato concentrate
containing 8 to 24% tomato solids (excluding seeds and
peels), and usually containing flavorings such as salt,
onion or garlic powder, herbs and flavorings
(Featherstone, 2015). To have economic impacts, tomato
sauce must retain quality attributes. However, quality
changes have been reported during storage of tomato
products (Wasim and Singh, 2015). Some of the factors
that have been reported to influence the quality of tomato
sauce include storage temperature and preservatives
added during tomato processing (Khan et al 2011;
Hossain et al., 2011). Some studies have reported that
tomato products stored at ambient temperatures are
prone to rapid spoilage than those refrigerated or frozen
(Safdar et al., 2010; Hossain et al., 2011; Wasim and
Singh, 2015; Lavelli and Torresani, 2011). These studies
observed increased rate of enzymatic reactions,
increased microbial growth or activities and decreased
consumer acceptance in tomato products stored at
ambient temperature. Another significant factor that
influences the quality of tomato sauce is lycopene
(Martinez-Hernandez et al., 2016). Lycopene, a pigment
responsible for the red colour of tomatoes and their
products can be degraded by processing conditions such
as lengthened durations of heating, high temperatures
and exposure to oxygen (Shi et al., 1999). These authors
reported that lycopene can be isomerised to its cis form
during processing and storage subsequently leading to
significant losses in the color of tomato sauce. Oxidation
of ascorbic acid, enzymatic and Maillard reactions have
also been reported to influence color loss in tomato
products and these impacted the overall acceptability of
tomato products (Wasim and Singh, 2015; Charles et al.,
2005). However, results are inconsistent, as some
authors have reported an increase in extraction efficiency
in lycopene when tomatoes were processed then stored
(Re et al., 2009). These discrepancies could be attributed
to differences in genetic composition, temperature of
storage, and the different heat treatments applied during
tomato products processing. As such, unanimous
conclusions on the effect of various storage conditions on
quality of tomato sauce have not been concluded.
Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate quality attributes
of homemade-tomato sauce stored at 6 and 30°C.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Preparation of homemade tomato sauce
The tomato sauce was prepared as described by Khan et al. (2011)
with modifications. One kilogram of sorted ripe tomatoes bought
from Lilongwe market, Malawi, was washed then blanched at 80°C
for 15 to 20 min after which they were cooled using cold water,
peeled and the resultant product was strained through a sieve to
remove the seeds. A table spoon each of oil, ginger, cloves garlic,
thyme leaves and corn starch were added to the resultant paste
and mixed well in a blender. The mixture was then heated for 4 to 5
min at 100°C and then sugar and salt were each added. The
mixture was further left to boil at the same temperature for 25 to 30
min with stirring. The product (sauce) obtained was further cooked
at a lower temperature until a desirable thickness was obtained.
Finally, corn starch was added to enhance thickening.
Tomato sauce packaging and storage
The prepared tomato sauce was packaged in 500 ml-bottles. Prior
to packaging, the bottles were pasteurized at 100°C for 15 min.
Sodium benzoate (0.01%) was added to the sauce (Heinz, 2013).
Finally, the bottles were cooled and stored at two different
temperatures, 6 and 30°C.
Sensory evaluation
The widely used 5-point hedonic scale for evaluating sensory
characteristics such as color, taste, flavor and texture was used (De
Groote et al., 2014). Panelists were asked to evaluate tomato
sauce at each testing time session on the 5 point scale (5 = Like
extremely; 4 = Like very much; 3 = Like moderately; 2 = Neither like
nor dislike; 1 = Dislike). In order to determine how much stored
tomato sauce (stored at 6 and 30°C) deviated from fresh sauce
(control) in terms of sensory attributes, a fresh tomato sauce was
made during each sensory evaluation session. Separately, same
panelists were asked to give point difference between fresh sauce
and stored sauce (6 and 30°C) on 0-5 scale (0 = no difference to 5
= very different). The differences between the stored sauce and the
fresh sauce were used in determining the paired mean differences.
Water was also availed to each panelist to clean their palates
before testing the next sample.
Study participants
Panelists were recruited through advertisement and those that met
the recruitment criteria were involved. The inclusion criteria included
people who consume or use tomato sauce in their homes or places
 Nkhata and Ayua 99

Table 1. Mean sensory scores for quality attributes of tomato sauce stored at 30 and 6°C for 8 weeks.

Storage periods (weeks) Temperature (°C) Color Taste Flavor Texture

a a a a
30 4.08 ± 0.67 4.02 ± 0.41 4.58 ± 0.52 4.42 ± 0.39
2 a a a a
6 4.50 ± 0.67 4.72 ± 0.46 4.67 ± 0.49 4.51 ± 0.57

a a a a
30 3.58 ± 0.51 3.58 ± 0.51 3.75 ± 0.62 3.61 ± 0.51
4 a a a a
6 4.00 ± 0.74 4.00 ± 0.74 4.08 ± 0.67 4.19 ± 0.39

a a a a
30 3.25 ± 0.75 3.00 ± 0.74 2.75 ± 0.62 2.66 ± 0.49
6 a b b b
6 3.75 ± 0.62 3.75 ± 0.64 3.75 ± 0.84 3.33 ± 0.19

b b b b
30 2.00 ± 0.73 1.75 ± 0.75 1.50 ± 0.52 1.75 ± 0.62
8 a a a a
6 3.58 ± 0.79 3.08 ± 0.79 2.75 ± 0.63 2.75 ± 0.67
Results shown as means ±SD, n = 52 means with different letters within column and per storage time are significantly different p<0.05 Tukey’s test.

of work and were at least 20 years of age. Fifty two panelists were
used at each testing session and they were blinded such that they
had no idea on how the sauce was made or stored. Panelists
signed a consent form before participation. All panelists were
briefed before testing sessions in order to enable them understand
the terminologies and procedures used during sensory evaluation.
Measurement of sauce pH
The pH meter (HI2210 Benchtop, Hanna Instruments, Inc., USA)
was used to measure pH of the samples and was done soon after
preparing the sauce to know the initial pH and during each
successive testing interval.
Evaluation of yeast and molds in tomato sauce
Yeast and molds were assessed using malt extract agar using the
standard spread plate technique (Thomas et al., 2015). Malt extract
agar was chosen because of its specificity to supporting growth of
yeast and molds, the main microbes growing in acidic tomato sauce
(Azam-Ali et al., 2003). The plates were covered, inverted, taped
shut and put at room temperature (25°C) for 3 to 4 days. After 4
days, the colonies were enumerated using a colony counter.
Statistical analysis
Data was analyzed using SPSS version 17 (SPSS Inc., USA) to
generate means, paired mean difference and standard deviations
for the quality attributes. T-test was used to determine significant
differences between means and paired mean differences. Results
were reported as means and standard deviations. Differences were
significant when the p-value < 0.05.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Sensory evaluation
During the first 4 weeks of storage, there were no
significant differences (p>0.05) in color, taste, flavor and
texture between sauce storage at 6 and 30°C.
Nonetheless, tomato sauce stored at 30°C was lower for
most sensory attributes (Table 1). At 6 and 8 weeks,
significant differences (p<0.05) in color, taste, flavor and
texture were noticed in sauce stored at 6 and 30°C. This
suggested that sensory attributes of homemade tomato
sauce can remain stable up to four weeks after which
deterioration in the attributes begin. Color remained
relatively stable from 2 to 6 weeks at 6°C (4.50±0.67 to
3.75±0.62) and 30°C (4.08±0.67 to 3.25±0.75), while
flavor exhibited the highest loss (p<0.05) with more
deterioration at 30°C (67%) compared to 6°C (41%)
within the same period. Taste and texture deteriorated
faster at 30 than at 6°C. This indicated that the change of
sensory characteristics could have been due to increased
microbial colonization (Table 3) and chemical reactions
taking place in the sauce. Therefore, temperature is very
critical for management of sensory qualities in stored
tomato sauce. These results are different from those of
Khan et al. (2011) who found insignificant differences in
sensory attributes in tomato sauce stored at 32 to 38°C
within the first 8 weeks. Unlike results in this study in
which only sodium benzoate was used, their highest
4
counts were 0.35 × 10 CFU/ml perhaps due to a large
array of hurdles they used such as vinegar, sodium
metabisulphite or sodium benzoate. The rapid changes in
sensory attributes during storage at 30°C could also be
due to increased metabolic activities of the
microorganisms present in the food (Heinz, 2013) which
speeds up the loss of sensory quality. At 8 weeks, the
average score for color and taste for sauce stored at
30°C were 2.00±0.73 and 1.75±0.75, respectively, while
that of flavor (1.50±0.52) and texture (1.75±0.62) also
scored very low (Table 1). Flavor and color changes have
been previously reported to be the key parameters used
to assess quality changes of stored tomato paste
products (Eckerle et al., 1984).
After 8 weeks, more than 60% quality characteristics
were lost at 30°C compared with 45% quality loss at 6°C
(Figures 2 and 3). This implies that shelf-life of
100 Afr. J. Food Sci.

Table 2. Paired mean differences for color, taste, flavor and texture between 6 and 30°C and fresh sauce (control) at different storage
time.

Weeks/Color INC vs. Fresh p-value REF vs. Fresh p-value INC vs. REF p-value
2 0.9167±0.229 0.002 1.1667±0.207 0.000 0.2500±0.329 0.463
4 3.1667±0.271 0.000 2.4167±0.260 0.000 -0.7500±0.351 0.056
6 3.6000±0.195 0.000 3.3333±0.225 0.000 -0.1667±0.207 0.438
8 3.3333±0.142 0.000 3.3333±0.142 0.000 0.0000±0.174 1.000

Week/Taste INC vs. Fresh p-value REF vs. Fresh p-value INC vs. REF p-value
2 1.4167±0.499 0.016 0.6667±0.449 0.166 -0.7500±0.524 0.180
4 2.6667±0.284 0.000 2.1667±0.271 0.000 -0.5000±0.379 0.214
6 3.8333±0.112 0.000 3.3333±0.188 0.000 -0.5000±0.151 0.070
8 3.3333±0.188 0.000 3.2500±0.218 0.000 -0.0833±0.149 0.586

Week/Flavor INC vs. Fresh p-value REF vs. Fresh p-value INC vs. REF p-value
2 1.6667±0.541 0.010 0.8330±0.313 0.795 -1.5833±0.417 0.003
4 2.9167±0.336 0.000 1.5000±0.337 0.010 -1.4167±0.358 0.020
6 2.9167±0.149 0.000 3.0833±0.229 0.000 0.1667±0.207 0.438
8 3.6667±0.142 0.000 3.0000±0.174 0.000 -0.6667±0.188 0.005

Week/Texture INC vs. Fresh p-value REF vs. Fresh p-value INC vs. REF p-value
2 0.9167±0.434 0.059 0.8333±0.297 0.017 -0.8330±0.260 0.754
4 3.0000±0.348 0.000 2.8333±0.271 0.000 -0.1660±0.423 0.701
6 2.9167±0.149 0.000 3.0833±0.229 0.000 0.1667±0.207 0.804
8 3.3333±0.188 0.000 3.1667±0.207 0.000 -0.1667±0.112 0.166
INC: Incubated sauce (30°C), REF: refrigerated sauce (6°C), Fresh: fresh sauce (Control).

Table 3. Microbial population (Yeast and Molds) in the tomato sauce during
the storage at different conditions.

Refrigeration (6°C) Incubation (30°C)

Storage period (weeks)
CFU/ml
2 2
2 9.8 ×10 9.8×10
3 4
4 2.1×10 3.2×10
4 5
6 3.9×10 1.51×10
4 5
8 6.2×10 1.14×10

homemade tomato sauce can be increased at low
temperatures especially at 6°C.
In order to understand how freshly made tomato sauce
(control) compared with stored ones, paired mean
differences between the three sauces were calculated
and results are shown in Table 2. There were significant
differences in color between fresh sauce and stored at
30°C after 2 weeks of storage (p = 0.002). The
differences remained significant for the rest of storage
period for all attributes. Similarly, sauce stored at 6°C
was significantly different in color and texture from fresh
sauce during whole storage time (p<0.001). However,
taste (p = 0.166) and flavor (p-values = 0.795) were not
different for the first two weeks of storage period.
Interestingly, the difference in color, taste and texture for
sauce stored at 6 and 30°C were insignificant throughout
the storage period (p>0.05) (Table 2). However, flavor
was significantly different between sauce stored at 6 and
30°C during the storage period (p <0.05) except after 6
weeks when the difference was non-significant (p =
0.438).
At low temperature, microbial growth was slowed down.
The 6°C that was used in this study could not possibly
decrease microbial growth significantly as psychrotrophs
can still grow at this temperature (King and Cheetan,
2012). However, the difference in temperature seemed to
contribute to the difference in microbial population with
sauce stored at 6°C having lower counts than that stored

Figure 1. Relationship between yeast and molds count and percentage change in sensory quality
attributes at 6°C.
at 30°C. Chilled foods stored at temperatures near 0 to
6°C have been reported to have longer shelf-life because
of slower growth of psychrotrophs leading to delayed
onset of spoilage (King and Cheethan, 2012). In fresh
fruits and vegetables, low temperature does not
necessarily stop enzymatic and non-enzymatic chemical
reactions but instead slows their rates thereby leading to
increased shelf-life in products (Kitinoja and Kader,
2002).
The quality loss of sensory attributes during 8 weeks
storage appeared a linear relationship (Figure 3). There
was strong negative linear relationship between sensory
attributes and storage time with coefficient of
2
determination (R ) for color, taste, flavor and texture
being 0.9576, 0.9663, 0.9697 and 0.9923, respectively,
for sauce stored at 30°C. The same trend was observed
2
in sauce stored at 6°C where the R for color, taste, flavor
and texture were 0.9539, 0.9775, 0.9576 and 0.9783,
respectively. For all the attributes the coefficient of x
(slope) was higher for sauce stored at 30°C ranging from
-0.3415 to -0.4415 than at 6°C which ranged from -
0.1795 to -0.2840. This indicates that the rate of quality
o
loss was higher at 30 C than that at 6°C perhaps due
higher microbial population in sauce stored at 30°C
(Table 3). Microbial spoilage results in drastic effects on
food quality as they can produce odor and gases as they
ferment the food particles (Stewart and Amerine, 2012).
Therefore, it is not surprising that after 8 weeks, sauce
flavor stored at 30°C had lowest score than other
attributes. In particular, spoilage in tomato sauce is
mainly attributed to yeasts and molds as they can survive
in acidic conditions (Azam-Ali et al., 2003) and the fact
that both sauces had a pH less than 4.5 it is more likely
that yeasts and molds were the most prevalent
Nkhata and Ayua 101
microorganism.
Yeast and mold counts and pH
The second measure that was employed to assess
quality changes of tomato sauce was by counts of yeasts
and molds. Yeasts and molds were greater in sauce
stored at 30 than 6°C in all cases except after 2 weeks.
At 8 weeks, sauce stored at 30°C yeast and molds count
5 4
was 1.14 × 10 CFU/ml while at 6°C was 6.2 × 10
CFU/ml (Table 3). Slight changes in pH were also
observed with time, 4.01 at zero time to 3.74 after 8
weeks. The pH of the homemade tomato sauce ranged
from 4.01 to 3.74, which falls within reported optimum pH
for controlling growth of microorganisms in tomato sauce
(Garcia and Barret, 2006). These findings suggested that
sodium benzoate can be used to maintain the pH of
tomato sauce where microbial growth can be controlled
(Khan et al., 2011). It has been previously reported that
benzoic acid was useful ingredient for microbial growth
inhibition in tomato pastes in a 40 weeks storage study
(Khan et al., 2011).
Deeper understanding of quality changes was sought
by plotting percentage change in sensory attributes
against microbial counts. There was an inverse
relationship between microbial population and sensory
qualities. The inverse association was more pronounced
in sauce stored at 30°C than at 6°C (Figures 1 and 2).
Table 3 shows that 30°C was more favorable for
microbial growth than 6°C as indicated by having higher
microbial count at 30°C than at 6°C after 8 weeks. As
such, a storage temperature is crucial for the storage of
sauces which may have high water activity usually
102 Afr. J. Food Sci.

Figure 2. Relationship between yeast and molds count and

percentage changes in sensory quality attributes at 30°C.

Figure 3. The linear regression lines between sensory mean score and
storage time for source stored at 6°C (A, B, C, D) and 30°C (E, F, G, H) stored
for 8 weeks.
 Nkhata and Ayua 103

between 0.93 and 0.98 (Fernandez et al., 1993) and Heinz HJ (2013). Principles and practices for the safe processing of
foods. In: Shapton DA, Shapton NF (Eds.), Butterworth-Heinemann
therefore prone to microbial storage.
Publishing Limited, Burlington, UK.
Helyes L, Lugasi A, Pogonyi Á, Pék Z (2009). Effect of variety and
grafting on lycopene content of tomato (Lycopersicon lycopersicum L.
Conclusion Karsten) fruit. Acta Aliment Hung 38(1):27-34.
Hossain N, Fakruddin M, Islam N (2011). Effects of chemical additives
Sensory characteristics of stored homemade tomato on the shelf life of tomato juice. Am. J. Food Tech. 6:914-923.
sauce are dependent on storage temperature and Hsu Y, Lai C, Chang C, Fan C, Chen C, Wu C (2008). Characterizing
microbial loads. Tomato sauce that was stored at 30°C the lipid lowering effects and antioxidant mechanisms of tomato
paste. Biosci. Biotechnol. Biochem. 72(3):677-685.
had higher microbial load and lost its sensory qualities
Kalogeropoulos N, Chiou A, Pyriochou V, Peristeraki A, Karathanos
faster than that stored at 6°C. Tomato sauce stored at VT(2012). Bioactive phytochemicals in industrial tomatoes and their
6°C had consistently higher sensory scores than ones at processing byproducts. LWT - Food Sci. Technol. 49: 213-216.
30°C. These findings suggest that shelf-life of homemade Kaur R, Savage GP, Dutta PC (2002). Antioxidant vitamins in four
commercially grown tomato cultivars. Proceedings Nutr. Soc. New
tomato sauce can be improved through storage at
Zealand 27:69-74.
refrigeration temperature. Khan KA, Abrahem M, Kalne AA, Mohite A (2011). Effect of chemical
preservatives on shelf-life of tomato paste stored at ambient
temperatures. SAARC J. Agric. 9(1):13-21.
CONFLICT OF INTERESTS King RD, Cheethan PSJ (Eds.) (2012). Food biotechnology, 1st Edition
Kindle edition, Springer Publishing Company, New York.
The authors have not declared any conflict of interests. Kitinoja L, KaderA (2002). Small scale postharvest handling practices: A
manual for horticultural crops, 4th edition. Postharvest Horticulture
Series No. 8E.
REFERENCES Lavelli V, Torresani MC (2011). Modelling the stability of lycopene rich
by products of tomato processing. Food Chem. 125(2):529-535.
Anthon GE, Barrett DM (2010). Changes in tomato paste during storage
Levy J, Sharoni Y (2004). The functions of tomato lycopene and its role
and the effects of heating on consistency of reconstituted tomato
in human health. Herbal Gram 62:49-56.
sauce. J. Text. Stud. 41(3):262-278.
Martínez-Hernández GB, Boluda-Aguilar M, Taboada-Rodríguez A
AVRDC (Asian Vegetable Research and Development Center) (1992).
(2016). Processing, packaging, and storage of tomato products:
Vegetable production and marketing. Proceedings of a National
Influence on the lycopene content food. Eng. Rev. 8(1): 52-75.
Review and Planning Workshop. Asian Vegetable Research and
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12393-015-9113-3
Development Center. Shamus, Taiwan, Taiwan. Publication 286 p.
Periago MJ, Garcia-Alonso J (2009). Bioactive compounds, folates and
https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19936791598
antioxidant properties of tomatoes (Lycopersicum esculentum) during
Ayua E, Mugalavai V, Simon J, Weller S, Obura P (2017). Comparison
vine ripening. Int. J. Food Sci. Nutr. 60:694-708
of a mixed modes solar dryer to a direct mode solar dryer for African
Raci E, Cetin K, Mustafa O (2014). Effect of temperature and packaging
indigenous vegetable and chili processing. J. Food Proc. Pres.
types on Ergosterol and Howard mold count values of tomato paste
Azam-Ali S, Judge E, Fellows P, Batcook M (2003). Small Scale Food
during storage. J. Food Prot. 77(3):503-505.
Processing. A directory of Equipment and Attitude 2nd Ed London,
Re R, Bramley P, Rice-Evans C (2009). Effect of food processing on
ITDG Publishing.
flavonoids and lycopene in a Mediterranean tomato variety. Free
Campbell JK, Canene-Adams K, Lindshield BL, Boileau TWM, Clinton
Rad. Res. 36(7):803-810.
SK, Erdman JW (2004). Tomato phytochemicals and prostate cancer.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10715760290032584
J. Nutr. 134:3486S-3492S.
Raiola A, Rigano MR, calafiore R, Frusciante L, Barone A (2014).
Canene-Adams K, Campell JK, Zaripheh S, Jeffery EH, Erdman JW
Enhancing the health promoting effects of tomato fruits for biofortified
(2005). The tomato as a functional food. J. Nutr. 12(4):274-277.
food. J. Mediat. Inflamm. ID 139873
Charles MT, Kalantari S, Corcuff R, Arul J (2005). Postharvest quality
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2014/139873
and sensory attributes of UV treated tomato fruit. Acta Hort. 682:537-
Safdar MN, Mumtaz M, Amjad M, Siddiqui N, Hameed T (2010).
542.
Development and quality characteristics of tomato paste stored at
De Groote H, Gunaratna NS, Okuro JO, Wondimu A, Chege CK,
different temperatures. Pak. J. Nutr. 9(3):265-268.
Tomlins K (2014). Consumer acceptance of quality protein maize
Shi J, Khatri M, Xue SJ, Mittal GS, Ma Y, Li D (2009). Solubility of
(QPM) in East Africa. J. Sci. Food Agric. 94:3201-3212.
lycopene in supercritical CO2 fluid as affected by temperature and
Eckerle JR, Harvey CD, Chen TS (1984). Life cycle of tomato paste;
pressure. Separation Purification Technol. 66(2):322-328.
correlation between sensory and instrumental testing methods. J.
Shi J, Maguer ML, Kakuda Y, Liptay A, Niekamp F (1999). Lycopene
Food Sci. 49:1188-1193.
degradation and isomerization in tomato dehydration. Food Res. Int.
Eunmi K, Suthawan C, Alyson ME (2012). Effect of industrial tomato
32: 15-21.
paste processing on ascorbic acid, flavonoids and carotenoids and
Stewart FG, Amerine MA (2012). Introduction to Food Science and
their stability over one year storage. J. Sci. Food Agric. 92(1): 23-28.
Technology, 2nd Edition, Academic Press, USA.
Food and Agriculture Organization Corporate Statistical Database
Thomas P, Sekhar AC, Upreti R and Mujawar MM (2015). Optimization
(FAOSTAT) (2015). Tomato world production statistics. Retrieved
of single plate-serial dilution spotting (SP-SDS) with sample
14th February 2018 from http://www.growtomatoes.com/tomato-world-
anchoring as an assured method for bacterial and yeast enumeration
production-statistics/
and single colony isolation from diverse samples. Biotechnol. Rep.
Featherstone S (2015). Food regulations, standards, and labelling. In: A
8:45-55.
Complete Course in Canning and Related Processes (Featherstone
Trivedi TK, Patel VH (2015). To study the effect of raw and processed
S, Ed.), Woodhead Publishing, Cambridge, UK. pp. 21-61.
tomato supplementation on plasma total antioxidant capacity. J. Med.
Fernandez-Salguero J, Gomez R, Carmona MA (1993). Water activity in
Health Sci. 4(4):38-43.
selected high moisture foods. J. Food Comp. Anal. 6:364-369.
Wasim SM, Singh JP (2015). Compositional alterations in tomato
Garcia E, Barrett DM (2006). Evaluation of processing tomatoes from
products during storage. Res. J. Chem. Environ. 19(2):82-87.
two consecutive growing seasons: quality attributes, peel-ability
andyield. J. Food Processing Preserv. 30:20-26.